Interest, enjoyment and pride after failure experiences? Predictors of students’ state-emotions after success and failure during learning in mathematics

Abstract

The current investigation was designed to identify emotion states students experience during mathematics activities, and in particular to distinguish emotions contingent on experiences of success and experiences of failure. Students' taskrelated emotional responses were recorded following experiences of success and failure while working with an individualised computer-based mathematics learning environment. In addition, relations between these patterns of emotional responses after success and failure experiences and trait-like motivational variables, self-concept of ability, subject value, orientation to learning from errors, goal orientation and causal attributions, were examined. Two separate studies are reported. In Study 1 emotions associated with success and failure experiences in mathematics were investigated in relation to self-concept of ability, subject value and orientation to learning from errors. In Study 2, patterns of emotion following success and failure were examined in relation to students' goal orientation and their causal attributions for success in school.

Learning from errors: A model of individual processes

“…Dweck & Leggett, 1988). Causal beliefs of the importance of effort for success were found to mediate the relationship between mastery orientation and retained positive affect after errors were made (Tulis & Ainley, 2011). In contrast, performance avoidance goals have been shown to be associated with increased negative affect following failure experiences and lower preference for difficult tasks (e.g.…”

“…Previous studies (e.g. Tulis & Ainley, 2011; have already demonstrated a positive relationship between students' (more stable) motivational orientations (i.e. positive self-concept of ability, mastery goal orientation, adaptive error-related beliefs) and emotional/motivational reactions following errors.…”

“…So far we have provided some evidence for the assumed functions of emotions at the stage pertaining to direct/primary and indirect/secondary reactions towards errors, the use of error-related regulation strategies, and the influence of selected personal conditions and contextual factors on individual responses to errors Tulis, 2013;Tulis & Ainley, 2011;Tulis & Dresel, 2013;Tulis & Fulmer, 2013;Tulis et al, subm.). In the present section we summarise the findings of three studies with different foci, namely individual determinants of adaptive dealing with errors (Study 1), motivational (self-regulation) processes following errors and their impact on subsequent learning behaviour (Study 2), and the dimensions of error climate and their impact on students' responses to errors (Study 3).…”

“…In particular, we included models that contribute to explain individual processes following errors-all of them further addressed in the next sections: the transactional stress/coping model based on primary and secondary appraisals (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984), aspects of volition theory (Kuhl, 1985(Kuhl, , 2000, feedback loops (Carver & Scheier, 1998), self-regulation models (Boekaerts, 2006;Winne & Hadwin, 1998) and theories of impasse or error-driven learning (De Leeuw & Chi, 2003;Kolodner, 1983Kolodner, , 1997Minsky, 1997;Oser & Spychiger, 2005;Van Lehn, 1988). Findings from studies on error management (Heimbeck, Frese, Sonnentag, & Keith, 2003;Keith & Frese, 2005) and error-related beliefs or attitudes (Rybowiak, Garst, Frese & Batinic, 1999;Tulis & Ainley, 2011;Tulis, Steuer & Dresel, subm.) complete our proposed model.…”

Mistake Detection Videos to Improve Students’ Motivation in Math

“…For example, excessively negative emotional responses to failure may lead to task avoidance (e.g., Tulis & Fulmer, 2013), whereas positive responses to failure can inspire persistence and effort to master the content (e.g., Schunk, Pintrich, & Meece, 2008). Specifically, students who remain positive despite failure tend to also view error feedback positively (Tulis & Ainley, 2011). Drawing from this literature, our design aimed to interrupt a demotivating cycle of beliefs that mistakes are a sign of low intelligence (see Figure 3) and support beneficial beliefs that mistakes are learning opportunities (see Figure 4).…”